On 2021/08/25 22:23, Sebastian Benoit wrote:
> Stefan Sperling(s...@stsp.name) on 2021.08.25 22:02:02 +0200:
> > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 08:13:26PM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> > > On 2021-08-25 18:02 +01, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > > Trying to announce a network on a wg(4) interface via ospf6
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 10:29:36PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/08/25 13:33, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:02:11 +0100, Stuart Henderson
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If I manually configure a link-local the interface is successfully
> > > added.
> > >
> > > Anyone have an i
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:20:58AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/08/25 19:58, Crystal Kolipe wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 06:02:11PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > If I manually configure a link-local the interface is successfully
> > > added.
> > >
> > > Anyone have an idea
On 2021/08/25 19:58, Crystal Kolipe wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 06:02:11PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > If I manually configure a link-local the interface is successfully
> > added.
> >
> > Anyone have an idea what the behaviour should be here? For passive
> > would it make sense to acc
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 06:02:11PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> If I manually configure a link-local the interface is successfully
> added.
>
> Anyone have an idea what the behaviour should be here? For passive
> would it make sense to accept an interface without link-local?
Is there a specif
On 2021/08/25 13:33, Daniel Jakots wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:02:11 +0100, Stuart Henderson
> wrote:
>
> > If I manually configure a link-local the interface is successfully
> > added.
> >
> > Anyone have an idea what the behaviour should be here? For passive
> > would it make sense to acce
Stefan Sperling(s...@stsp.name) on 2021.08.25 22:02:02 +0200:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 08:13:26PM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> > On 2021-08-25 18:02 +01, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > Trying to announce a network on a wg(4) interface via ospf6d, just
> > > using passive to pick up the prefix, i.
On 25 August 2021 22:02:02 CEST, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 08:13:26PM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
>> On 2021-08-25 18:02 +01, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> > Trying to announce a network on a wg(4) interface via ospf6d, just
>> > using passive to pick up the prefix, i.e.
>>
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 08:13:26PM +0200, Florian Obser wrote:
> On 2021-08-25 18:02 +01, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > Trying to announce a network on a wg(4) interface via ospf6d, just
> > using passive to pick up the prefix, i.e.
> >
> > interface wg0 { passive }
> >
> > It's failing with "/etc/o
On 2021-08-25 18:02 +01, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> Trying to announce a network on a wg(4) interface via ospf6d, just
> using passive to pick up the prefix, i.e.
>
> interface wg0 { passive }
>
> It's failing with "/etc/ospf6d.conf:10: unnumbered interface wg0".
>
> With -v I get 'interface with i
On Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:02:11 +0100, Stuart Henderson
wrote:
> If I manually configure a link-local the interface is successfully
> added.
>
> Anyone have an idea what the behaviour should be here? For passive
> would it make sense to accept an interface without link-local?
I discussed about tha
Trying to announce a network on a wg(4) interface via ospf6d, just
using passive to pick up the prefix, i.e.
interface wg0 { passive }
It's failing with "/etc/ospf6d.conf:10: unnumbered interface wg0".
With -v I get 'interface with index 27 not found' (this is "normal"
with ospf6d) and the routa
12 matches
Mail list logo
